Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
STATION
CSPAN 48
LANGUAGE
English 48
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)
military leaders talked about alternative energy production and the country's dependence on oil. speakers included gene sperling, director of the white house international council, and republican senators. hosted by securing america's future energy, this is about an hour-and-a-half. >> good morning, everyone. thank you all for coming. i especially want to thank the members of the energy security leadership council for being with us today. they have been a distinguished group of people working on this issue since 2006. we are nothing without their credibility as the great ceo's, an entrepreneur, and military leaders of our time. i also want to give a special>> i want to give a special thanks to the staff at securing america's future energy. we stand on the shoulders and the time it takes to get these reports. the policy staff, james, leslie, the staff that puts these together, our political staff and the rest of the team at safe. we're seeing more production than we have ever seen before. the most production in the last couple of decades of year on year growth. oil imports are falling. the
institute. up next, will continue our "america by the numbers" series. the future of u.s. energy production in 2014. we will be joined by adam sieminski and frank verrastro. >> i think writers institute is something that is very important within the culture. we are a culture of words, of voices. words are key to our imagination, our capacity to invasion -- envision things. we ourselves are not completely tied to print on the page, but there is no other art forms so readily accessible other than perhaps film, which we work with, too. there is something in literature that just captures the human spirit. >> this weekend, joined "book tv" and "american history tv" as we look at the historic and literary life of new york's capital, albany. >> the chiefs of staff had to make the plan for the invasion of japan without considering the atomic bomb. it was estimated it would cost 700,000. >> i choose to honor both, both the sacrifice of american servicemen fighting their way to the pacific and of a little girl who died as a result of an atomic bombing. it is unimaginable but that must of been like --
that climate change is the biggest single challenge that we face and we can't move fast enough to do energy efficientcy better. the other point about that from the governor's perspective is it is a jobs creator. as we move to energy efficientcy which is good for climate change but america cannot afford to continue to import oil that is going be $5 or whatever it is going to be in the future put all that money out there countries that donets like us instead of keeping our energy resources here at home. what we're doing in many of our states is growing renewables, producing renewables which creates manufacturing jobs. take our energy efficientcy obligations more seriously. there is no better way to save money than using less energy. the result is we're growing jobs from it. i can tell you here in vermont we have more green, clean high-tech jobs per capita than any other state in the country. we're moving so quickly on those areas that we now have the fastest growth rate in the northeast. we're the only state in the nation to have income growth in 2011. climate change is not only important for
change is the single biggest challenge we face and we cannot move fast enough to do energy efficiency better. from the governor's perspective, it is a job creator. as we move to renewable and energy efficiency, which we have to do for climate change and because america cannot afford to continue to import oil that is $4, five bucks, which ever is going to do what we're doing in many of our states is growing wables. les -- grenoble' the result is that we are growing jobs from its. in vermont, we have more high- tech jobs per capita than any other state in the country. we are moving so quickly in those areas we now have the fastest growth rate in the north east. we were the only state in the nation to see income growth in 2011. we cannot move fast enough to do energy efficiency better. it is also a huge jobs creator. if we get it right we will find that climate change is an economic opportunity that the industrial revolution or the technology boom were. >> you rattled off a number of states. what is it like being a new chairman? have you gone through a boot camp and now you know everythi
. rich countries on the planet. this new energy opens all kinds of jobs we need most, right now. middle-class work. [applause] the way our interest rates and currency are treated is another cause of unpredictability injected right into our economy. over time. place. they're just taking a big chunk out of middle-class families in the care. i wish more americans had the just like the members of congress do. that is why we should all be shocked that obamacare cuts the amount you can contribute. this is also what obamacare did, and not only requires you to get a prescription to purchase over-the-counter medications and pay for it -- that is willing to sell it to them. with tax-free money, just like their employers buy it now. [applause] create the conditions for are created, we cannot growth not have the skills to get hirednot so long ago, even if you do not graduate from high school, are able to find a job that paid enough for a home and eventually for a better life. ahead. work programs is in miami-dade, florida. years ago, they set up numerous work training programs are working with empl
the energy bill was published last week. it gives the green light for many jobs. will the prime minister continue in investing skills training that people can get the jobs that will be created? >> i think my friend is absolutely right. the entry of the energy bill now means we can get out there and sell to all of the energy companies the very clear and stable framework that the u.k. has for offshore wind, renewables and for gas. i think it is a positive development and it has a huge amount of potential investment and we need to make sure that results in british jobs and we're committed to making that happen. >> the prime minister believes it lacks something that is bonkers. how will the prime minister cut the bills who just said over the coming months and years tens of thousands of new homes have to be built on greenfield sites? >> i think it is clear, yes we should build on brown field land. yes, we should try to deal with the problem of empty homes. we do need to have a frank conversation about the need to build more flats and more houses so we don't have the current situation that we
americany: -- mr. mcnerney: this morning i rise about two things i care passionately about. wind energy and veterans. i spent more than 20 years in the wind industry as a technology development engineer. in those days we saw some spectacular failures and dramatic failures, but every year we put more into the technology development. little bit this year in the aerodynamics, gear box, foundation, every year a little incremental improvement in the control systems, field testing so we understood what was going on and the power electronics, and today we have an industry that is a spectacular industry. . the touchins produce power for five cents per kilowatt. it's been a successful business. the united states dominated that business because of consistent policies, consistent tax policies. we could rely on the policies being there year after year. investors came in, engineers came in. in the early 1980's those policies began to change and the technology began to leave our country and we've seen -- i've seen in my career the incentives come and go over the years. i can tell you it's devastating
need to do more. we should expand our domestic energy industry. american innovation has given us access to massive new deposits of oil and natural gas, making america one of the most energy- rich countries on the planet. this new energy opens all kinds of new middle-class jobs come from the fields and platforms woodrow, to the manufacturing plants that return to the united states with a lower cost of energy, and these are the types of jobs we need most, right now. middle-class work. we need to take full advantage of this. [applause] by tearing down unnecessary regulatory barriers to tapping our own energy sources. a sound monetary policy would also encourage. the way our interest rates and currency are treated is another cause of unpredictability injected right into our economy. we need to have a balanced approach to regulation. we need to weigh the benefit of any given regulation against the impact it will have on job creation. that is why we should implement something like senator paul's act, so that congress that's the final say on it. -- gets the final say on it. [applause] getting
. i see this when i travel. a huge commitment to public resources. huge energy to enthusiasm of higher education. india wants 1500 new universities by 2020. alicia's in a meeting about hong kong this week. i learned that hong kong university is expanding undergraduate education from three years to four years because they think it is not giving students enough time. there are all these buildings going up. here we are being told in the united states that maybe we should reduce ourselves from four years to three years. another aspect. let me insert here so much of what our discussion is about. with travel to india and china ever was to hear about the liberal arts. they want to introduce a broader education into their countries. they think that the ability to imagine, it to be creative, and to envision a world differently relates to understanding other places and people. these are so much a part of the humanities and social sciences. it is the whole panoply of the liberal arts. this is under tremendous pressure. there are recognizing this advantage. why do we want to spend our time on a br
. american greatness, limited government, and traditional family values. he is a member of the energy and commerce committee, and has established himself are still living conservative views to national energy policy, which may come up today. congratulations on a successful term, and welcome. [applause] we have a few minutes to ask a few questions, to get some thoughts from jim and steve about how they see the issues ahead of for the past couple of years. jim and i have gotten to know each other over the past couple of years. i have enjoyed that. we have seen a lot of stuff going on. not nearly as much wheeling and dealing as you have seen in congress. i am sure you have the scars to show for it. over the past tumultuous years, what of the biggest things you think you have learned? >> thank you for having us and for the great work you and your organization do. your books have been tremendous. many rsc members have enjoyed the info. i used the second one, the road to freeman. i have to give a presentation in charge. you were quoted from the hall but. >> have no souls were saved that sun
to make sure america leads the world in research and technology and clean energy. i want to put people back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our schools. [applause] that's how we grow an economy. i want us to bring down our deficits, but i want to do it in a balanced, responsible way. and i want to reward -- i want a tax code that rewards businesses and manufacturers like detroit diesel right here, creating jobs right here in redford, right here in michigan, right here in the united states of america. [applause] that's where we need to go. that's the country we need to build. and when it comes to bringing manufacturing back to america -- that's why i'm here today. since 1938, detroit diesel has been turning out some of the best engines in the world. [applause] over all those years, generations of redford workers have walked through these doors. not just to punch a clock. not just to pick up a paycheck. not just to build an engine. but to build a middle-class life for their families; to earn a shot at the american dream. for seven and a half decades, through good times a
u.s. energy information society and the center for strategic and international studies. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning. it is friday, december 7, 2012. the 71st anniversary on the attack of pearl harbor. reaction continues this morning over yesterday's resignation announcement of jim demint. the approach and fiscal clift deadline continues to loom over congress and the white house. that is where we want to begin. is it ok for leaders to compromise, or should they stick to their principles and would it be ok if doing so sent us over the fiscal cliff? give us a call this morning. you can also catch up with us on all of your favorite social media websites. a very good morning to you. i want to begin with the question of compromise or sticking to principle. this is a question a gallup organization asked in a recent poll. it found 62% of americans would like to see the federal government leaders compromise on an agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff budget measures set to go into effect next month. more than twice the 25% who want leaders to stick to their principles. a m
are better. they have the staffs. they look at it aggressively. i am older. i have less energy. that makes it harder. >> tell us something about the obama white house that we do not know. >> what does obama think of mitt romney? what does he really think? i think he feels that romney is incompetence because he did not run a better campaign. i suspect that one of the teams in all of the coverage of the campaign is going to be that romney never found a way to -- either the method or the theme of how to run against obama were as they thought it was going to be easy. >> we are about to get the hook here -- the penultimate question. what is the one thing you would like to know about president obama that you do not? >> i did ask him this. i did not put it in the book. he keeps a diary. i would like to have access. [laughter] he said, i said, do you keep a diary? he said, yes, but not on all of these details. i said the outcome on -- i said, come on. let's see it. i am sure he will write a really interesting them more. >> what did he tell you about the diary? >> that it existed. no detail. he did
and incentivizing energy and innovation in manufacturing. there are tax deductions we can get rid of. they are old and we do not mean them. it is important to the investment community. we know there are a lot of companies that are sitting on millions of dollars, billions of dollars, waiting for the right moments. if we want them to start spending in, we better make some hard decisions. we need to give them some certainty. you mentioned when the debt ceiling tucks happens before the republicans -- he mentioned with the debt ceiling talks happened before. we have to reach some agreement. we have to do it for the long term as well as the short term. >> you are doing an exemplary job. when we polled people about what is the to do list for washington, the debt was number one. the availability of good paying jobs, the social security system. what of the actions we could take that would have the biggest payoff for the next 10 or 20 years? eliminating the deficit write only fifth. people think other things are more important -- the education system, promoting manufacturing and the education -- the manufac
could go without access to energy sources -- open up access to energy sources. the new revenues must not be used for more spending and used to reduce the deficit. how we would lock that in my rather a failure, i do not have the solution to. it is important to note there are revenues that are acceptable to conservatives. that leads me to the otherour long-term issue really is the spending issue. to the extent we have tax revenues low today, not because of the rates, because the economy is underperforming. the economy is quite weak right now. we should see much stronger lower. we want to see policies put in place that strengthen the economy and also begin to tackle this longer term spending issue we have driven primarily through entitlements. when it comes to those, there are a number of very broad, bipartisan support of the recommendations easily available to the president and speaker boehner and other leaders want to come together and get serious about making a down payment on our fiscal future. that leads me to the fourth issue -- it is possible to solve this without raising taxes.
business with key sectors in the iranian economy, with energy and ship building and shipping and the ports, this amendment that would shut down businesses that are involved in sectors which fund the proliferation activities of iran and that regime is crucial. in addition, the amendment is going to prohibit business with all designated persons connected to the iranian government. it bans trades and commodities used in these key sectors and used to stop iran from receiving payment in gold or using oil payments in local currency then to buy gold and we have to stop an effort to water down these sanctions. i say that because i remember the votes in the past. i remember our effort on the central bank. it was only because we got unanimous votes because we got so much support that we were able to deploy those. but let me add that there is another portion of the amendment here that targets the regime for their human rights abuses. and i think one of the areas where we've been short, for those of you who have talked to to those in the prison there and experienced the torture, who have seen the murd
. with respect to health care costs and energy costs. and then i think it will create the conditions under which businesses will be able to create a renaissance of american competitors. i think that is a brilliant agenda. i think we have agreed that as the distinguished alumnus of harvard said washington as a town with northern charm and southern efficiency. let's assume we go through the fiscal cliff. immigration, corporate tax reform, and investments. emigration, you're not doing the dramatic. vietor due to comprehensive immigration but we did not have a chance to do it. both wings cayman decided it would sabotage it. maybe republicans learned the lesson but i am not sure how much of a lesson. the way that was financed was through the corporate tax increase but there -- that had people on both sides will in to work with the white house and congress. when you talk about infrastructure spending and investments in things we have done with nih, all the talk now is about death. >-- how do you do what the ambitious and admirable the agenda envisions? >> will have the discussion of the debt ceiling a
for her dict and someone who has stepped up when it comes to energy issues in the ohio delegation, specifically on re-enriching uranium. our navy relies on uranium and jean made it a point to fight for a domestic source to power aircraft carriers and submarines. without a reliable source of fuel, the navy wouldn't be able to protect the homeland or fight abroad but not only that, jean has been a voice of fiscal responsibility in her time in congress and i wish her the best going forward. my colleague betty sutton, i want to thank her for her service to ohio and the nation. we had a hard fought and extremely competitive campaign. throughout it, she maintained a level of professionalism and integrity not often seen in american politics. i want to thank her for her service and i wish her the best of work with her future endeavors. last but not least, my friend steve latourette who has been a friend, a guide, a trusted confidant and someone who i have looked to as a mentor. he and i both strongly supported a couple of issues, development of fuel cell technology through the solid state
, in the building trades. those individuals, those who work in the energy industry in all shapes, forms and sizes. those who may be in the vocational trades. maybe even nurses and nurses aids, who are lifting patients all day long. thank god for them. we see them all the time when we're visiting the sick and our relatives or we're in the hospital system of what i'm saying is, you cannot have a cookie that fits all. you cannot immediately jump to entitlement reform between now and december 31. here's a solution. the bipartisan voices have said pass the senate bill or pass the elimination of the tax cuts on the top 2%. but i believe that 100% of americans will get it. we cannot then jump to entitlement reform now. it would not be wise. it is not prudent. it does not work. when you talk about 65 to 67, that's a lifetime. because what you do as the gentleman has said york uh throw seniors into the marketplace, you save a buck and they have to spend two bucks, three bucks, four bucks and then on top of those four bucks, they'll have doored slammed in their faces, the affordable care act was premised o
. -- it was in the 1990's. because we are more competitive on energy prices and people are saying we will be relatively competitively on the energy price component and construction and cost, i think there is reasonable evidence we are starting to pull in more manufacturing. we may have hit the bottom the started in 1979. there is a reason for hope. i think the metaphor is the automobile out. there might even be more policy there. i cannot imagine if there is an aggressive policy on manufacturing and construction -- that is another word for infrastructure, and there might be some hope, especially for less skilled mails. >> i am glad anthony mentioned energy cost. we have done even mention climate change, which i think is going to be -- it all way -- already is a major issue for the world to face. it will only grow in importance and significance. looking at the development boom and the potential for shell gas and shale oil is a real opportunity and challenge. an opportunity for significant economic growth, an opportunity to move away from dirtier fossil fuels and maybe served as a bridge into renewable e
know, they have staffs and they work at it aggressive plea. i'm older and i have less energy. so that makes it harder. >> and tell us something about the obama white house that we don't know. >> what does obama think of mitt romney? what does he really think? and i think he feels that romney is incompetent because he didn't run a better campaign. and i suspect that one of the themes in all the coverage of the campaign is going to be romney never found a way to -- either the method or the theme of how to run against obama. whereas they thought it was going to be easy. >> we're about to give the hook here. what is the one thing you would like to know about president obama that you don't? >> oh, i did ask him this. i didn't put it in the book. he keeps a diary. and so i'd like to have access. [laughter] >> assume that's for -- >> do you keep a diary? yes. not on all this detailed kind of -- let's see it. so that's going to -- i'm sure he will write a really interesting memoir. >> what did he tell you about the diary? >> that it existed. no detail. he didn't offer any of it or read f
on energy and manufacturing and research, deeply about whether he will help nih push us to the next frontiers of alzheimer's and other important biomedical research," and then say, "it is not really my business, i am not a budget%, to worry about whether we are pending on our discretionary budget." what i have to say to folks is that you cannot pretend you care deeply about innovation and research and investing in early childhood and investing in science and stem education if you are indifferent to whether or not we reduce our budget deficit by simply taking deeper and deeper cuts in domestic discretionary budget. at some point you skip to a point where you are simply treating of between -- trading off between early to childhood and biomedical research and higher education. those are not trade-offs the american public wants us to make. when we talk about getting our fiscal discipline, our fiscal house in order, i want to remind people that when i was here in the early 1990's, one of the clarion calls, one of the reasons people make that case, was that if we had expanding deficits, i
people. we must not let american innovation in our energy industry go to waste. we have the potential for all kinds of new middle class jobs- from the fields and platforms where we drill, to the manufacturing plants that will return to the u.s. with the lower cost of energy. but we need government to encourage these job opportunities, not continue to block them. a return to sound monetary policy would also help by making the future value of a dollar more predictable. and we must get the cost of health insurance under control. you should be able to get a health care plan that fits your needs and your budget, from any company in america that's willing to sell it to you, and with the same tax benefit if you buy it yourself or have an employer buy it for you. these ideas will help create middle class jobs. but we also have to make sure that our people have the skills to do these new jobs. and a limited government can help by promoting curriculum reform, teacher training and empowering parents with the freedom to choose their kids' school. our tax code should reward education investments t
for energy, is one of an innovative program that has collection bins for commercial fishermen to dispose of unwanted fishing gear. it's disposed more than 700 of obsolete dare elect gear which -- dire elect gear which has lost marketable lobster and saves up to $792 million in damages to boat propelers from direlect fishing gear. if that isn't enough, the energy from them recycles gear. it doesn't cost the fishermen anything to dispose of this gear and that's why it's such a successful program. this small federal investment results in huge cost savings. marine debris is much larger and a growing problem. with disasters in japan last year and the recent storms like sandy, cleaning up debrises requires both resources and coordination between agencies and states. while i commend the bipartisan support and leadership of my colleagues to get this bill to the president, i'm disappointed that the program's authorization has not been extended. i will continue to work for permanent re-authorization of the marine debris program because it is a critical for program development in coastal communitie
, a discussion and a look at the future energy production and consumption in
, there is this real energy around compromise. thinking about four years from now, the end of obama's second term, by that time you think the economy will improve? 51% say it will improve, and 39%, and economic well-being of the middle class -- i have to catch up with my slides here. there we go. the deficit and that will improve is 34%. the one thing they are certain is taxes will increase and government spending will increase. in the next four years, how effective do you think the government will be on each of the issues? this is how it basically stacks up. insuring long-term future entitlement programs, social security, medicaid, 65% think that what happened. 64% say creating jobs, 64% say improving public education, growing economy, and lowering the federal deficit falls down at 48%. not as much confidence there as there are on the other items. we then said the united states faces a number of challenges, including large budget deficits, national debt, slower economic recovery from the recession, high unemployment, and a deep political divide on many issues. do you believe we will overcome the
and china. we need energy, but we need to move onto clean energy. that is one of the president's priorities. he can create a whole new infrastructure that replaces the military industrial that eisenhower warned us about. host: thank you for the call. speaking along the lines of the environment and the epa. there is this -- from "to the boston globe" -- this from "the l.a. times" -- from "the gazette" in colorado -- our question for you is, what the think the president's no. 1 priority should be? just is joining us on the democrat line. caller: good morning. it was a little bit of serendipity that you read the editorial from "the new york times." i believe the first priority, our entire government should be repairing the infrastructure of the country. we have some infrastructure from the 19th century. with what just happened in new york, i really do think that our treasure and our people -- repairing the infrastructure will create jobs. we also have to begin protecting our coastal communities from the mega storms. even if we just decided right now to work against climate change or to slow do
is the time, energy, and attention that has been spent on these tax policies, and the neglect of the broader challenges we face. this is the fantasy of bill and donald that the entire world is focused on capping deductions and what the ramifications are and this is how they spend their lives, so they are in their element, but -- of the broader goals here. -- but we sometimes lose sight of the broader goals here. as maya was saying, the first question i wanted to answer, does this stall the problem? we have a medium-term problem which is the 10-year window, we're going to borrow $10 trillion unless we change our policies. then we have what we feel is a primary threat to the future, the long-term problem. before we get to the detail of what the percentage should be, we need to make sure that whatever we negotiate solves those problems. it is essential that revenue be part of the equation. not only for political reasons, but numerically it is difficult to do the spending cuts alone. you need to cut the budget by 30% over the long term, and that will not be supported by the people in the long ha
, alexander hamilton, observe energy is a leading character in good government. the president must lead in a divided government and must not advocate his or her -- not abdicate hor or her responsibility. president obama has the responsibility to propose a real bipartisan plan to avert the fiscal cliff that can pass both the house and the senate. withdrawing from the recommendations of the simpson- from thewing recommendations of the simpson- bowles commission, the president could propose a plan that would not only avert the so-called fiscal cliff, but also help us avert the fiscal abyss. if president obama were to offer such a plan, republicans would act favorably. going over the cliff is unnecessary. as it has been observed in "the wall street journal," the president is boxing in the republicans. he is offering them a deal they cannot accept. first, the president has repeatedly called for a balanced solution involving both revenue and less spending. what is obvious to the most casual observer is that this plan is not a balanced. the fiscal cliff involves nearly four dollars of anticipa
of that was compromise to get it through. particularly in real to get people out of their cars for energy for the environment. we have to be able to spend the money, 7%. 2.5 years after stimulus we only had $67 billion. 35% was still sitting in washington. we have to change the law. there's some things express and the government accountability report on the selection of some of these projects. their release this march of 2011. specifically at -- bay released this march of 2011. specifically they said there were concerns about transparency and other issues with it. they cannot verify some of the criteria by which some of these projects were selected. can you cite any improvement in that process? you were citing a number of projects but also criticized by gao for the process. >> we tried to improve our decision making process. we have tried to use the governors as our partners on these projects. receiving proposals from them and from the state's and working with them -- states and working with them. try to improve our process for selecting projects. >> the other most recent report by the in
secretary of the treasury, alexander hamilton, observe energy is a leading character in good government. the president must lead in a divided government and must not advocate his or her responsibility. president obama has the responsibility to propose a real bipartisan plan to avert the fiscal cliff that can pass both the house and the senate. withdrawing from the recommendations of the simpson- bowles commission, the president could propose a plan that would not only avert the so-called fiscal cliff, but also help us avert the fiscal abyss. if president obama were to offer such a plan, republicans would act favorably. going over the cliff is unnecessary. as it has been observed in "the wall street journal," the president is boxing in the republicans. he is offering them a deal they cannot accept. first, the president has repeatedly called for a balanced solution involving both revenue and less spending. what is obvious to the most casual observer is that this plan is not a balanced. the fiscal cliff involves nearly four dollars of anticipated revenue from higher taxes for every dollar
support for the program. host: a tweet -- guest: yes and no. it actually does count energy costs and things like that. however, there is a big discussion among a lot of the advocacy groups who do not to think it truly reflects the cost increase that singers have to pay period i. when the government of the calculation, they take a large basket of items every month and a measure how much prices change. energy, housing, education, transportation, all kinds of things, health care. and there is concern that health care may be is not as big a part of that calculation as it should be, especially for older americans, because older americans may not spend much on education or spend as much on daily transportation, but they probably spend more money on health care each year that other folks do. health-care costs have traditionally gone up higher than inflation every year. so there's some concern it does not truly reflect their cost of living increase each year. host: we're talking about how social security factors into the fiscal cliff. c-span has part of our website set up specifically fo
in energy and commerce. thank you for your service and friendship. it is hard to go through this list. mr. miller, this is a wonderful privilege to say thank you, the countless hours that you could add up for the service to constituents and the tremendous leadership within this body and these members who have given their all and will not be back at the 113th. it's important to say their names and to honor them and give them credit for what they have done. joe baca has been a fixture for the central valley and agriculture, someone who has agriculture number one in my district as well. but there is much to remember joe baca for and his contributions in agriculture and the financial services committee as well. my colleague, former colleague, bob filner, who has already assumed another position within our government, as mayor of san diego. i think of bob filner and i think of veterans' issues and he was a college professor before he came to congress, as my husband was and reached out to each other in that capacity. he has worked hard on veterans' issues. i have 50,000 veterans in my district.
of organizations that have come to the floor on this bill to oppose it. the committee, energy and commerce committee, heard expert medical testimony that primatene mist is not safe or recommended for treating asthma. we have a chart here. these are the groups that opposed this bill. i urge you to vote no. the lung association, thoracic society, american academy of pediatrics, asthma and allergy foundation. all the people involved in health are saying they don't want this drug on the market. it will only confuse asthma patients. it is not the safest drug that they could have. the gentleman from texas has said, take it off the market. it is off the market. it hasn't been taken off because of safety. but it is not recommended by the medical community. there is another group here called the alliance for responsible atmospheric polcy. i would like to indicate some of the organization that is are part of that alliance. some of the major corporations in this country. i want to show a chart of those who are in favor of this bill. armstrong pharmaceuticals. the one company that will benefit from th
use as many smart people as we can here. working on new technologies and new energies to have a robust economy. we're not going to grow more than 2%, which is current growth rate unless we innovate more. that will require entrepreneurs. we will not get unemployment down significantly below 8% unless we innovate more. as mark said at the beginning, almost all of the net jobs in the last 30 years have been created by young, high-growth companies so this is the place to focus. >> right here. second row. >> thank you. my name is ed bell from alexandria. i'm proud father of a fourth year at president sullivan's fine institution. the topic i have on my mind is at an intersection of the areas of interest of our fine panelists and that is online education. keck tivety, -- connectivity, internet, greater trend towards access education, making the great institutions that we have in this country available to people throughout our country and throughout the world either inexpensively or in many cases for free. and this creates in some sense a competitive landscape force across the world where we'r
and vietnam had a new dispute over the energy exploration. and vietnam accused a chinese fishing boat of cutting off the cable of the vietnamese vessel. mr. secretary, how would you respond to this new development? and also, why are many people accused of -- accuse chinese reaction of more assertive? do you think exploring in a dispute order -- the energy in a dispute order is a good behavior to calm down a situation over there? thank you. >> let me say, and this relates to the earlier question, obviously we have seen these new regulations having been issued in hainan. they do raise some concerns not just in the united states but regionally. we have gone in at high levels and asked for clarification and underscored our overall policy of seeking to avoid provocations and to maintain peace and stability more generally. one of the challenges that we face, and richard alluded to it, is that many people believe that some of these areas involve very potentially rich resources and reserves of natural gas and petroleum. i think, in certain circumstances in the south china sea and elsewhere, w
this coalition -- those who are not here today have brought here together to try to inject some energy at the right place at the right time. next up here will be senator sam nunn, a longstanding chairman at -- of senate armed services, who understands our national security as well or better than anyone i have ever worked with. [applause] >> first, thanks to pete peterson for getting this group together and for so much else. and what the peterson foundation has done in terms of bringing attention to the fiscal challenge we face and mobilizing support for a rational and sane and fiscal policy. second, admiral mullen, thank you for your tremendous leadership, both in military and as a citizen in recent months. you have led the way in your statement that basically the biggest risk that we have to national security is our debt and our unsustainable fiscal policy is one that i totally endorse and agree with. i commend you for making it. your impact is very powerful. that is really my first point. my second point is that even if we avoid the short-term debt crisis, the so-called cliff, and i
committee i wanted to serve on, i thought, ok, i'll get what i need. i told him i wanted energy and commerce. and he chewed on his cigar and he said, you'll get ed and labor and you'll like. it but jack was a great leader and role model. he supported civil rights bills, refused to sign the southern manifesto in 19 of a an helped write the historical civil rights act. may we also remember congressman jack brooks. he was a great man, a political figure, a u.s. marine veteran and a friend that i'll never forget. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: ask unanimous consent to address how it's for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, starting at the age of 15, i worked any job i could find to support myself throughout college. manually dug ditches, construction work, plant work. after college i found an entry-level position in the field in which i sturdied. and with hard work i have constantly been employed for 36 years
, go ahead. caller: this social security, some rocket scientists figured out that we do not need energy that we do not need, paying for these increases for two years. now they are reviewing it and i am just sort of disappointed with our people up there. they just do not seem to understand that they are not doing their job. this crisis, everything that happened, the people are not doing their jobs. the only way to get rid of them, i am just really disappointed. host: i assume you are on medicare? caller: yes, i am. host: how much do you get each month? caller: $1,200. i am also on disability. my pension and stuff. they always bring it back to the older people. they always want to tax us for the problems that they create. host: what do you think about the idea of raising the eligibility age for medicare over a certain amount of years? caller: it depends on the operation you are in. i was a mechanic and my knees went to hack. i do not know what they do with people like me who have a job that you have sacrificed your body for. what happens then? host: this is a q and a piece from "the balti
to propose, raising the gas tax to fund more highways. i nee we we need to get to energy independence. i think that's really where we need to go. host: i want to show our viewers what they administration and then what the republicans are proposing in order to avoid sequestration, these automatic spending cuts on the domestic side. the white house says 01-year for all of sequestration and multi- year stimulus package. i think it figures that $50 billion. is that a good idea? guest: i am for deferring the sequester so we can have congress work on a multi-year budget. how that is done is a larger debate. but the big issue in the federal budget is entitlements spending. that's where the action is. that's where the money is. that's where the problem is. it is true that this portion of the budget can take some cuts. we should do it in a careful way. we should not do an indiscriminate sequestered. i agree with all that. but the budget framework, we need to take on the growing cost of medicare and medicaid and social security. those are the drivers of deficit. if we can come as part of avoiding
in the western hemisphere and produces 1/4 of the country's energy supply, we refuse to abandon the world's most important financial and commercial center. instead we must improve the resiliency of our communities, environment and essential services and vulnerable populations with smart planning and well-designed recovery and rebuilding tools. we have the ability to reduce the consequences of severe weather. by mitigating flood risk through smarter land use guidelines, building codes and flood protection improvements. the state of new york has requested $9 billion for mitigation measures from the administration. the state of new jersey is seeking another $7 billion for the same purpose. i commend governor quomeow and governor christie for -- cuomo and governor christie for including strategic needs in their funding request. both of these leaders have demonstrated inble compassion and concern for the people who they represent and have been highly effective in their leadership since the disaster began and it may also include mayor bloomberg, mayor booker and many other local officials that stepped
new people. we must not let american innovation in our energy industry go to waste. we have the potential for all kinds of new middle class jobs- from the fields and platforms where we drill, to the manufacturing plants that will return to the u.s. with the lower cost of energy. but we need government to encourage these job opportunities, not continue to block them. a return to sound monetary policy would also help by making the future value of a dollar more predictable. and we must get the cost of health insurance under control. you should be able to get a health care plan that fits your needs and your budget, from any company in america that's willing to sell it to you, and with the same tax benefit if you buy it yourself or have an employer buy it for you. these ideas will help create middle class jobs. but we also have to make sure that our people have the skills to do these new jobs. and a limited government can help by promoting curriculum reform, teacher training and empowering parents with the freedom to choose their kids' school. our tax code should reward education
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)